Jurisprudential Challenges of Imposition of Ancillary and Supplementary Punishments on Perpetrators of Punitive Crimes and Retaliation in the Islamic Penal Code Approved in 2013

The adaptation of laws, in particular penal laws with jurisprudential principles, is one of the important issues of legislation after the victory of the Islamic Revolution. One of the issues discussed in criminal law is the complementary and consequential punishment. The Iranian legislator, in Articles 23-25 of the 1979 Islamic Penal Code, allows the judge, regarding to the crime and the characteristics of the person who committed the crime, to convict the criminal with one or more supplementary penalties and deprive him from social rights as ancillary punishments. Considering the general principles governing the Islamic punishment and retaliation (Qisas), in particular stability of its measurement depends on answering this question: is the spreading of the supplementary and ancillary penalties of discretionary punishment awarded by judge to Islamic punishment and retaliation consistent with religious principles? After referring to library resources, the opinions of jurists, and judicial procedure, and while expressing instances of supplementary and ancillary penalties in Islamic jurisprudence, this research has evaluated the reasons of the supporters and opponents and has showed that imposing other extrajudicial punishment other than Islamic punishment or retaliation is prohibited and spreading the limited number of extrajudicial punishments to Islamic punishments and retaliation in jurisprudence are some specific instances that stated by the holy lawgiver which is out of the general rule of the stability of the measure of the punitive and retaliatory punishment. Therefore, the absoluteness and generality of Articles 23 to 25 of the said law and the application of complementary and consequential punishment in all Islamic punishments and retaliation is not correct.